J/A+A/686/A151 Merging galaxies in isolated env. (Calderon-Castillo+, 2024)
Merging galaxies in isolated environments. I.
Multiband photometry, classification, stellar masses, and star formation rates.
Calderon-Castillo P., Nagar N.M., Yi S., Orellana G., Chang Y.-Y.,
Leiton R., Hughes T.M.
<Astron. Astrophys. 686, A151 (2024)>
=2024A&A...686A.151C 2024A&A...686A.151C (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Galaxies, photometry ; Photometry ; Ultraviolet ; Optical ;
Infrared
Keywords: galaxies: fundamental parameters - galaxies: interactions -
galaxies: photometry
Abstract:
Extragalactic surveys provide significant statistical data for the
conditions. These quantities are derived using manual or automatic
methods for disturbances, star-forming regions) and its environment
(galaxies in galaxy detection and flux measurement in imaging data at
different irregularities present in resolved nearby galaxies (e.g.
clumps, tidal disturbances, star- forming regions) and its environment
(galaxies in overlap).
Our aim is to provide accurate multi-wavelength photometry (from the
UV to the IR, including GALEX, SDSS, and WISE) in a sample of ∼600
nearby (z<0.1) isolated mergers, as well as estimations of M* and SFR.
We performed photometry following a semi-automated approach using
SExtractor, confirming by visual inspection that we successfully
extracted the light from the entire galaxy, including tidal tails and
star-forming regions. We used the available SED fitting code MAGPHYS
in order to estimate M* and SFR. Results. We provide the first
catalogue of isolated merging galaxies of galaxy mergers including
aperture-corrected photometry in 11 bands (FUV, NUV, u, g, r, i, z,
W1, W2, W3, and W4), morphological classification, merging stage, M*,
and SFR. We found that SFR and M* derived from automated catalogues
can be wrong by up to three orders of magnitude as a result of
incorrect photometry.
Contrary to previous methods, our semi-automated method can reliably
extract the flux of a merging system completely. Even when the SED
fitting often smooths out some of the differences in the photometry,
caution using automatic photometry is suggested as these measurements
can lead to large differences in M* and SFR estimations.
Description:
Multiband Photometry, Classification, Stellar masses, and Star
Formation Rates.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
pccmc.dat 359 920 PCC merger catalogue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: pccmc.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 9 A9 --- PCCMC PCCMC Name
(PCCMCNNN, PCCMCN/nnb for companion)
11- 20 F10.6 deg RAdeg Right ascension (J2000)
22- 31 F10.6 deg DEdeg Declination (J2000)
33- 41 F9.6 --- z ? Redshift
43 I1 --- MType [0/5]? Morphology (0=Spiral, 1=Elliptical,
2=S0, 3=Highly Disturbed)
45 I1 --- Class [1/8]? Merger Stage Classification (1)
47- 55 E9.3 Jy FFUV ? FUV Flux
57- 65 E9.3 Jy e_FFUV ? FUV Flux error
67- 75 E9.3 Jy FNUV ? NUV Flux
77- 85 E9.3 Jy e_FNUV ? NUV Flux error
87- 95 E9.3 Jy Fu ? u-band Flux
97-105 E9.3 Jy e_Fu ? u-band Flux error
107-115 E9.3 Jy Fg ? g-band Flux
117-125 E9.3 Jy e_Fg ? g-band Flux error
127-135 E9.3 Jy Fr ? r-band Flux
137-145 E9.3 Jy e_Fr ? r-band Flux error
147-158 F12.9 Jy Fi ? i-band Flux
160-168 E9.3 Jy e_Fi ? i-band Flux error
170-181 F12.9 Jy Fz ? z-band Flux
183-191 E9.3 Jy e_Fz ? z-band Flux error
193-204 F12.9 Jy FW1 ? W1 Flux
206-214 E9.3 Jy e_FW1 ? W1 Flux error
216-224 E9.3 Jy FW2 ? W2 Flux
226-234 E9.3 Jy e_FW2 ? W2 Flux error
236-244 E9.3 Jy FW3 ? W3 Flux
246-254 E9.3 Jy e_FW3 ? W3 Flux error
256-264 E9.3 Jy FW4 ? W4 Flux
266-274 E9.3 Jy e_FW4 ? W4 Flux error
276 I1 --- Wflag [0/5]? Photometry Flag (0=ok,
1=two components within same aperture)
278-284 F7.3 --- chi2 ? chi2 of MAGPHYS fit
286-292 F7.3 [Msun] logMs2.5 ? Percentile 2.5th of the stellar mass
294-300 F7.3 [Msun] logMs16 ? Percentile 16th of the stellar mass
302-308 F7.3 [Msun] logMs50 ? Percentile 50th of the stellar mass
310-316 F7.3 [Msun] logMs84 ? Percentile 84th of the stellar mass
318-324 F7.3 [Msun] logMs97.5 ? Percentile 97.5th of the stellar mass
326-331 F6.3 [Msun/yr] logSFR2.5 ? Percentile 2.5th of the star formation
rate
333-338 F6.3 [Msun/yr] logSFR16 ? Percentile 16th of the star formation rate
340-345 F6.3 [Msun/yr] logSFR50 ? Percentile 50th of the star formation rate
347-352 F6.3 [Msun/yr] logSFR84 ? Percentile 84th of the star formation rate
354-359 F6.3 [Msun/yr] logSFR97.5 ? Percentile 97.5th of the star formation
rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Merger Stage Classification as follows:
1 = I
2 = II
3 = IIIa
4 = IIIb
5 = IIIc
6 = IVa
7 = IVb
8 = V
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements:
Ashniet Caskortish, Ashniet.Caskortish(at)gmail.com
(End) Patricia Vannier [CDS] 18-Mar-2024